Welcome, Guest
You have to register before you can post on our site.

Username
  

Password
  





Search Forums

(Advanced Search)

Forum Statistics
» Members: 275
» Latest member: Jack Martel
» Forum threads: 6,524
» Forum posts: 12,205

Full Statistics

Online Users
There are currently 860 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 858 Guest(s)
Bing, Google

Latest Threads
Recommended Websites
Forum: General Commentary
Last Post: Stone
3 hours ago
» Replies: 6
» Views: 10,018
Video Compilation: 62 Rea...
Forum: Fr. Hewko's Sermons, Catechisms, & Conferences
Last Post: Stone
3 hours ago
» Replies: 0
» Views: 15
Fourth Sunday of Advent [...
Forum: Advent
Last Post: Stone
3 hours ago
» Replies: 6
» Views: 17,735
Abp. Lefebvre - Fourth Su...
Forum: Sermons and Conferences
Last Post: Stone
3 hours ago
» Replies: 0
» Views: 16
The World into which Chri...
Forum: Advent
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 06:59 AM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 5,528
St. Alphonsus Liguori: Da...
Forum: Advent
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 06:58 AM
» Replies: 5
» Views: 8,023
Fourth Week of Advent
Forum: Advent
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 06:56 AM
» Replies: 3
» Views: 8,898
Fr. Hewko's Sermons: Four...
Forum: December 2024
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 04:58 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 61
Fr. Hewko's Sermons: Feas...
Forum: December 2024
Last Post: Stone
Yesterday, 04:55 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 47
Satanic display at New Ha...
Forum: General Commentary
Last Post: Stone
12-21-2024, 08:48 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 105

 
  Archbishop Lefebvre - On the Modernist Orientation of the Conciliar Church
Posted by: Stone - 11-19-2020, 12:39 PM - Forum: Archbishop Lefebvre [by topic] - No Replies

Quotes of Archbishop Lefebvre - On the Modernist Orientation of the Conciliar Church

  • “Hence, we should have no hesitation or fear, hesitation such as, "Why should we be going on our own? After all, why not join Rome, why not join the pope?" Yes, if Rome and the pope were in line with Tradition, if they were carrying on the work of all the popes of the 19th and the first half of the 20th century, of course. But they themselves admit that they have set out on a new path.” (Two Years After the Consecrations, September 6, 1990)
  • “Thus those who were with us and were working with us for the rights of Our Lord, for the salvation of souls, are now saying, "So long as they grant us the old Mass, we can shake hands with Rome, no problem." But we are seeing how it works out. They are in an impossible situation. Impossible. One cannot both shake hands with modernists and keep following Tradition. Not possible. Not possible.” (Two Years After the Consecrations, September 6, 1990)
  • “There are those who are for the Syllabus and Pascendi, and there are those who are against. It is simple. It is clear. Those who are against are adopting the principles of the French Revolution, the modern errors. Those who are for the Syllabus and Pascendi remain within the true Faith, within Catholic doctrine. Now you know very well that Cardinal Ratzinger has said that as far as he is concerned Vatican II is "an anti-Syllabus". Therewith the cardinal placed himself clearly amongst those who are against the Syllabus. If then he is against the Syllabus, he is adopting the principles of the Revolution. Besides, he goes on to say quite clearly: "Indeed we have now absorbed into Church teaching, and the Church has opened herself up to, principles which are not hers but which come from modern society," i.e., as everyone understands, the principles of 1789, the Rights of Man.” (Two Years After the Consecrations, September 6, 1990)
  • “I think that many of those that left us to rejoin Rome, -isn’t that right - did not rightly understand what liberalism is and how the Roman authorities at the moment, since the Council in particular, are infested with these errors. They did not understand. If they had understood, they would have fled, they would have avoided, they would have stayed with us. But they do not want to believe these errors. This is serious because by moving closer to these authorities, one is necessarily contaminated. These authorities are imbued with these principles, live with these principles – these principles of liberalism. Inevitably, they act in conformity with their ideas. And therefore, they can only have relations with us. They begin to have relations with us – relations which little by little impose these ideas on us, since they are the authorities. They are the authorities and we are the subordinates, so they impose these ideas on us. It is impossible otherwise. As long as they do not rid themselves of these errors – these errors of liberalism and modernism – there is no way we can come to an agreement with them. It is not possible. We cannot approach them because immediately we have to submit to their orientations.” (Conference, September 22, 1988)
  • “I said to him [Cardinal Ratzinger] ‘Even if you grant us a bishop, even if you grant us some autonomy from the bishops, even if you grant us the 1962 Liturgy, even if you allow us to continue running our seminaries in the manner we are doing it right now—we cannot work together! It is impossible! Impossible! Because we are working in diametrically opposing directions. You are working to de-Christianize society, the human person and the Church, and we are working to Christianize them. We cannot get along together!’ (Marcel Lefebvre, Bp. Tissier de Mallerais, p. 548)
  • “I waited until June 5th to write to the Pope: I regret, but we cannot go along with this. You do not have the same goal as us. In making an accord, your goal is to bring us back to the Council. Mine, on the other hand, is to keep us outside the Council and your influence.” (Flavigny, France, December 1988, Fideliter No. 68, p.15)
  • But however it may be, we are convinced of this, it is they who are wrong, who have changed course, who have broken with the Tradition of the Church, who have rushed into novelties, we are convinced of this. That is why we do not rejoin them and why we cannot work with them; we cannot collaborate with the people who depart from the spirit of the Church, from the Tradition of the Church.” (Conference, December 13, 1984)
  • “We are not up against a little thing. It is not enough for them to tell us: “You may say the old Mass, but you have to accept it [the Council].” No, it is not only that [the Mass] which divides us, it’s doctrine. That’s clear. That is what is so serious about Dom Gerard’s [choice], and that’s what did him in. Dom Gerard never saw anything but the liturgy and monastic life. He does not see clearly the theological problems with the Council, with religious freedom. He does not see the malice of these errors.” (Fideliter No.66, September-October 1988, pp. 12-14)
  • This new faith, it is a new religion. It is a protestant religion. That is a fact! How is it possible that the Pope gives the authorization to this change? How is it possible that the Pope can sign this constitution [on liturgical change]? It is a deep mystery.” (Conference, May 11, 1976)
  • “My dear friends, you continue to represent the true Church, the Catholic Church. I think you need to he convinced of this: You really represent the Catholic church! I don’t say there is no Church outside of us, it’s not about that. But recently, we are told that it was necessary that the Tradition enter into the visible Church. I think a very, very serious mistake is committed here. Where is the visible Church? The visible Church is recognized by the marks that have always been given to visibility: One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic. I ask: Where are the true marks of the Church? Are they more evident in the official Church (this is not the visible church, it is the official church) or in us, in what we represent, what we are? Clearly we are the ones who preserve the Unity of the Faith which disappeared from the official church. One bishop believes in this, the other not, faith is different, their catechisms contain abominable heresies. Where is the unity of the Faith in Rome?” (Archbishop Lefebvre, Econe, Sept. 9, 1988)
  • We tremble at the thought that the infiltration of modernism, that is to say naturalism, may continue in the Church. The consequences of this veritable cancer are the most serious that the Church has had to undergo during the course of her history; that is, the corruption of the Faith of numerous bishops and a great number of priests, monks and nuns. These clerics reason like the modernists and the protestants: witness the newly published book “Bishops Speak of the Faith of the Catholic Church.” The ideas of sanctifying grace, original sin, mortal sin and its consequences, of the expiatory Sacrifice of Our Lord which continues on our altars, are all spoiled. In their place one finds all the errors of liberalism, of Americanism, of Sillonism, and of modernism condemned by the Sovereign Pontiffs. Add to that the theology of liberation which is a marxist interpretation of the Gospel—a sacriligious and outrageous misinterpretation of Our Lord. Therefore, let us not be amazed that the patience of God is exhausted!” (Archbishop Lefebvre, Letter to Friends and Benefactors No. 15)
  • The Catholic Church will not be occupied forever by the Modernists and progressives who are taking advantage of their authority to push through all these innovations destroying the Faith. (Letter to Friends and Benefactors, September 1981)

Print this item

  Archbishop Lefebvre - On the Second Vatican Council
Posted by: Stone - 11-19-2020, 12:34 PM - Forum: Archbishop Lefebvre [by topic] - No Replies

Quotes of Archbishop Lefebvre - On the Vatican II Council

  • “The more one analyzes the documents of Vatican II, and the more one analyzes their interpretation by the authorities of the Church, the more one realizes that what is at stake is not merely superficial errors, a few mistakes, Ecumenism, Religious Liberty, Collegiality, a certain Liberalism, but rather a wholesale perversion of the mind, a whole new philosophy based on modern philosophy, on subjectivism… A wholly different version of Revelation, of Faith, of philosophy! Very grave! A total perversion! How we are going to get out of all this, I have no idea, but in any case it is a fact, and as this German theologian shows (who has, I believe, another two parts of his book to write on the Holy Father's thought), it is truly frightening. So, they are no small errors. We are not dealing in trifles. We are into a line of philosophical thinking that goes back to Kant, Descartes, the whole line of modern philosophers who paved the way for the Revolution.” (Two Years After the Consecrations, September 6, 1990)
  • “…it is nonetheless certain that the Council was deflected from its purposes by a group of conspirators and that it is impossible for us to take any part in this conspiracy, despite the fact that there may be many satisfactory declarations in Vatican II. The good texts have served as cover to get those texts which are snares, equivocal, and denuded of meaning, accepted and passed.” (from I Accuse the Council)
  • “We believe we can affirm, purely by internal and external criticism of Vatican II, i.e. by analyzing the texts and studying the Council’s ins and outs, that by turning its back on Tradition and breaking with the Church of the past, it is a schismatic council.” (Archbishop Lefebvre, Le Figaro, August 4, 1976)
  • “It is stupefying to read in the Documentation Catholique that the Lutheran-Catholic Commission of the Secretariat for Christian Unity, and thus an official Roman commission, said in effect that numerous points in the Council were drawn from the teachings of Luther…” (Conference in Germany, October 29, 1984)
  • “Some say the Council was good and has good, but only the reform is bad. But that is not true! Why? Because when Rome gave the reform, they always say the reforms they do, they do in the name of the Council. In the name of the Council! It is evident that all reform came from the Council, and if the reform is bad, it is impossible that the Council is good and all reforms are bad. Because that is the authentic interpretation of the Council by Rome!” (Conference, May 11, 1976)
  • This Council gives the same rights to error as to Truth! That is impossible.” (Conference, May 11, 1976)
  • “We refuse, on the other hand, and have always refused to follow the Rome of neo-Modernist and neo-Protestant tendencies which were clearly evident in the Second Vatican Council and, after the Council, in all the reforms which issued from it. ... This reform, since it has issued from Liberalism and from Modernism, is entirely corrupt. It comes from heresy and results in heresy, even if all its acts are not formally heretical. It is thus impossible for any faithful Catholic who is aware of these things to adopt this reform, or to submit to it in any way at all. To ensure our salvation, the only attitude of fidelity to the Church and to Catholic doctrine, is a categorical refusal to accept the reform. ... That is why we hold fast to all that has been believed and practiced in the faith, morals, liturgy, teaching of the catechism, formation of the priest and institution of the Church, by the Church of all time; to all these things as codified in those books which saw day before the Modernist influence of the Council.” (Declaration of Faith, November 21, 1974)
  • “We can think that there is Rome and Rome: [on one hand,] there is the Rome which is eternal in Her Faith, Her Dogmas, Her concept of the Sacrifice of the Mass; [on the other hand,] there is the temporal Rome which is influenced by the ideas of the modern world, an influence which the Council itself did not escape.” (October 13, 1974)
  • “The Church, in the course of the 1960's, thus during the Council, acquired values that have come from outside the Church, from the liberal culture - due secoli - from two centuries of liberal culture. It is clear: these are the "rights" of man, it is religious freedom, it is ecumenism. It is Satanic.” (Conference, December 13, 1984)
  • "Without rejecting this Council wholesale, I think that it is the greatest disaster of this century and of all the past centuries, since the founding of the Church." The Angelus A Matter of Principle
  • I never…I don’t accept the Council! Because you are destroying the Catholic State in the name of the Council! It is sure! It is evident!…This Council gives the same rights to error as to Truth! That is impossible…This new faith, it is a new religion. It is a protestant religion. That is a fact! How is it possible that the Pope gives the authorization to this change? How it is possible that the pope can sign this constitution (on liturgical change)? It is a deep mystery…If I take the position of the Council, I am betraying my Mother Church.” (Archbishop Lefebvre, conference, 1976)
  • We [Bishop de Castro Mayer and the Archbishop] fought together to prevent the errors of Liberalism, which are a cancer in the doctrine of the Church, spreading themselves in the texts of the Council. ... Unfortunately, this Liberal principle has been adopted by Vatican II. ... If one does not want to believe that these texts are Liberal, one has just to see the consequences: ecumenism (all religion on an equal footing), and the laicization of the states. Ordination Sermon 1988
  • And, so I said to him [Cardinal Ratzinger], "What is the source of these bad fruits? For me, it is the Council of aggiornamento; that signifies the Council of the changes. What changes? Changes in the sacraments, changes in catechisms, changes in the Bible, so that we are no longer Catholics [but] are like Protestants. ... And he said, "No! No, no, no, that does not come from the Council; it comes from bad interpretations of the Council; it comes from abuses of the reforms." I said, "That is not true. That comes from the new orientation of the Church in the Council, especially by ecumenism." Changes in the Sacraments...We are like Protestants 1985
  • “It is stupefying to read in the Documentation Catholique that the Lutheran-Catholic Commission of the Secretariat for Christian Unity, and thus an official Roman commission, said in effect that numerous points in the Council were drawn from the teachings of Luther…” (Conference in Germany, October 29, 1984)
  • The Church has always dreaded novelties, even in her vocabulary and that is why she has held on so strongly to the Latin language in the principal form of Tradition, viz. the Roman Church. For it is by a tendency to novelty that heresies, schisms, and errors have come about. This spirit of novelty, mutation, and change has succeeded in entering into the Church. It necessarily tends to destroy Tradition. The Second Vatican Council, which wished to be the Council of "up-dating," opened the door to this spirit of change and novelty. (Principles and Directives - 1982 General Chapter)
  • The Council should have been the occasion of the reaffirmation of the Truth of the Church and the necessity of the social reign of Jesus and Mary against the errors of Protestantism and Teilhardian naturalism and against socialism and communism. Ordinary Protestants would have been converted en masse. They were disposed to it and their debacle was profound on the eve of the Council. But the Modernists, traitors to the Church, used the Council to favor their compromise with all the modern errors, profiting from a weak pope and a pope disposed to radical changes. All of the commentators on the Council recognize the triumph of the liberals who did not hide their satisfaction and who neutralized or drove from the Roman Curia all of the conservatives and who took the reins of government, centralizing power in the Secretariat of State in order to be certain of managing the ecumenical revolution so much desired by the enemies of the Church. The work was quickly carried out in all fields. Destruction also followed quickly. In this pastoral Council the spirit of error and lies was able to work at its ease, placing time-bombs everywhere which, in due course, would destroy the institutions. (Principles and Directives - 1982 General Chapter)

Print this item

  Archbishop Lefebvre - On the Indult
Posted by: Stone - 11-19-2020, 12:06 PM - Forum: Archbishop Lefebvre [by topic] - No Replies

Quotes of Archbishop Lefebvre - On the Indult Mass



“I myself also during these years have not ceased asking of Rome: leave us this liberty! And so, faced with the insistence of many people, and mine also, they finally decided to do something. Unfortunately however they have added to it incredible conditions. It's absolutely unimaginable, after all this, to be interrogating people on their opinion: Do you reject the New Mass? If you reject the New Mass, then you don't have the right to say the old one. ...To my mind, this decree is a typical example of the present mentality at Rome, the progressive mentality. This is a progressive decree; it is not a traditional decree where Rome would act out of consideration for the holiness of the Mass, for the holiness of the faithful, for the apostolate and good of souls, the glory of God. No, it's not that. It's pure politics. They conducted a referendum . . . a poll . . . to see who were in agreement; because there was still a small group holding out, they decided to make a concession, but to also add some conditions. That is politics, the same kind they practice in democracies—it's not supernatural at all. (Archbishop Lefebvre, The Church, The Priesthood and the Tridentine Indult, 1984)

" ...the religious authorities would only grant this freedom [of the Indult] on condition that the traditional Mass not be celebrated out of contempt for the New Rite. They would require priests to say the New Mass at least once in a while. It is difficult not to descry in the arrangement of the conditions a maneuver destined to put pressure on traditional priests to convince them to celebrate the New Mass.” sspx.org/en/archbishop-lefebvre-indult-mass
[*]
Availing ourselves of the Indult is tantamount to putting ourselves into a state of contradiction because at the same time that Rome gives the Fraternity of St. Peter, for example, or Le Barroux Abbey and other groups authorization to say the Mass of All Time, they also require young priests to sign a profession of faith in which the spirit of the Council must be accepted. It is a contradiction: the spirit of the Council is embodied in the New Mass. How is it possible to desire to preserve the Mass of all time while accepting the spirit that destroys this Mass of All Time? It is completely contradictory.” sspx.org/en/archbishop-lefebvre-indult-mass

“One day, very gently, they will oblige those who have been granted the use of the Tridentine Mass, the Mass of All Time, also to accept the New Mass. And they will tell them that it is simply a matter of squaring themselves with what they have signed, since they signed a statement that they accepted the spirit of the Council and its reforms. You cannot put yourself thus into an unbelievable, irrational contradiction. It is a very uncomfortable situation. This is what has created the difficulty for these groups that have signed it and that currently find themselves in a kind of impasse." (Homily, Friedrichshafen, April 29, 1990) sspx.org/en/archbishop-lefebvre-indult-mass

“Instead of looking to their friends, to the Church's defenders, to those fighting on the battlefield, they look to our enemies on the other side. "After all, we must be charitable, we must be kind, we must not be divisive, after all, they are celebrating the Tridentine Mass, they are not as bad as everyone says"—but they are betraying us—betraying us! They are shaking hands with the Church's destroyers. They are shaking hands with people holding modernist and liberal ideas condemned by the Church. So they are doing the devil's work.” (Two Years After the Consecration, September 6, 1990)

Print this item

  Archbishop Lefebvre - On the Novus Ordo Missae
Posted by: Stone - 11-19-2020, 11:04 AM - Forum: Archbishop Lefebvre [by topic] - No Replies

Quotes of Archbishop Lefebvre - On The Novus Ordo Missae [the New Mass]

  • “And we have the precise conviction that this new rite of Mass expresses a new faith, a faith which is not ours, a faith which is not the Catholic Faith. This New Mass is a symbol, is an expression, is an image of a new faith, of a Modernist faith… Now it is evident that the new rite, if I may say so, supposes another conception of the Catholic religion - another religion.” (Sermon, June 29, 1976)
  • “I will never celebrate the Mass according to the new rite, even under threat of ecclesiastical penalties and I will never advise anyone positively to participate actively in such a Mass." (Conference April 11, 1990)
  • “The current Pope and bishops no longer hand down Our Lord Jesus Christ, but rather a sentimental, superficial, charismatic religiosity through which, as a general rule, the true grace of the Holy Ghost no longer passes. This new religion is not the Catholic religion; it is sterile, incapable of sanctifying society and the family.” (Spiritual Journey, p. ix)
  • “It is the new Mass in itself. It is not the priest who is saying it. It is not because he says it piously or anything that the new rite changes. It doesn’t change anything in the rite of the Mass. It is obvious that this new rite is a rite that has been made only to draw us closer to the Protestants. That is clear! (April 11, 1990)
  • This Mass is poisoned, it is bad and it leads to the loss of faith little by little. We are clearly obliged to reject it.” (The Mass of All Times, p. 353)
  • “It must be understood immediately that we do not hold to the absurd idea that if the New Mass is valid, we are free to assist at it. The Church has always forbidden the faithful to assist at the Masses of heretics and schismatics even when they are valid. It is clear that no one can assist at sacrilegious Masses or at Masses which endanger our faith.…All these innovations are authorized. One can fairly say without exaggeration that most of these [new] Masses are sacrilegious acts which pervert the Faith by diminishing it. The de-sacralization is such that these Masses risk the loss of their supernatural character, their mysterium fidei; they would then be no more than acts of natural religion. These New Masses are not only incapable of fulfilling our Sunday obligation, but are such that we must apply to them the canonical rules which the Church customarily applies to communicatio in sacris with Orthodox Churches and Protestant sects.” (The New Mass and the Pope, November, 8, 1979)
  • “… this [new] rite is bad! Is bad, is bad. And the reason why this rite is bad in itself, is because it is poisoned. It is a poisoned rite! Mr. Salleron says it very well, here:
    "It is not a choice between two rites that could be good. It is a choice between a Catholic Rite and a rite that is practically a neighbor to Protestantism,”

    and thus, which attacks our Faith, the Catholic Faith! So, it is out of the question to encourage people to go to Mass in the new rite, because slowly, even without realizing it, they end up ecumenist! It’s strange, but it's like that. It is a fact. Then, ask them questions on ecumenism, on what they think of the relations with other religions and you will see! They are all ecumenist. For the priest himself, the fact of saying this mass and celebrating it in a constant manner, even without thinking about anything, about its origin, or why it was made, turns him and the people who assist at it ecumenist.” (Conference, April 11, 1990)
  • "This union which liberal Catholics want between the Church and the Revolution is an adulterous union — adulterous. This adulterous union can only beget bastards. Where are these bastards? They are [the new] rites. The [new] rite of Mass is a bastard rite. The sacraments are bastard sacraments. We no longer know whether they are sacraments that give grace. We no longer know if this Mass gives us the Body and the Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ. ... The priests emerging from the seminaries are bastard priests." (Homily preached at Lille, August29, 1976)
  • “The radical and extensive changes made in the Roman Rite of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and their resemblance to the modifications made by Luther oblige Catholics who remain loyal to their faith to question the validity of this new rite.”(Écône, February 2, 1977)
  • “Your perplexity takes perhaps the following form: may I assist at a sacrilegious Mass which is nevertheless valid, in the absence of any other, in order to satisfy my Sunday obligation? The answer is simple: these Masses cannot be the object of an obligation; we must moreover apply to them the rules of moral theology and Canon Law as regards the participation or the attendance at an action which endangers the faith or may be sacrilegious. The New Mass, even when said with piety and respect for the liturgical rules, is subject to the same reservations since it is impregnated with the spirit of Protestantism. It bears within it a poison harmful to the faith.” (An Open Letter to Confused Catholics, Ch. 4)
  • “The current problem of the Mass is an extremely serious problem for the Holy Church. I believe that if the dioceses and seminaries and works that are currently done are struck with sterility, it is because the recent deviations drew upon us the divine curse. All the efforts that are made to hang on to what is being lost, to reorganize, reconstruct, rebuild, all that is struck with sterility, because we no longer have the true source of holiness which is the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Profaned as it is, it no longer gives grace, it no longer makes grace pass.” (Archbishop Lefebvre, August 1972, priestly retreat)
  • We must not forget that the conciliar reforms of the liturgy, the reforms of the Bible, the changes in the internal structure of the Church, of the constitution of the Church—all these things are a result of the ecumenical spirit. That is clear, since Protestants were present for the changes in the Mass—six Protestant ministers were photographed with Pope Paul VI who thanked them for having come to participate in the liturgical commission, which transformed our Catholic Mass! Everything was done in this ecumenical spirit: liturgical reforms, catechetical reforms, an ecumenical Bible—which is sold in the bookstore at the Vatican. There was then, a considerable Protestant influence.” (Conference in Germany, October 29, 1984)
  • “…if they are going to the New Mass—slowly, slowly they change their mind and become, slowly, slowly Protestant. It is very dangerous to go to the New Mass regularly, each week, because the New Mass is not some accidental change, but it is a whole orientation, a new definition of the Mass. It has not the same definition as the True Mass.” (Interview, St. Michael’s Mission, Atlanta, April 27, 1986)
  • “… So, if someone asks me: “I only have Mass of St. Pius V once a month. So what should I do on the other Sundays? Should I go to the New Mass if I do not have the Mass of St. Pius V? ...
    I reply: Just because something is poisoned, obviously it is not going to poison you if you go on the odd occasion, but to go regularly on Sunday like that, little by little the notions will be lost, the dogmas will diminish. They will become accustomed to this ambiance which is no longer Catholic and they will very slowly lose the Faith in the Real Presence, lose the Faith in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, and have a spirituality, since the prayers are changed and they have modified everything, in the sense of another spirituality. It is a new conception of Christian spirituality. There is no longer any ascetical effort, no longer a combat against sin, no longer a spiritual combat. There is a great need to combat against our own tendencies, against our faults, against everything which leads us to sin. So I would say to them: Listen, I cannot advise you to go to something which is evil. Myself, I would not go because I would not want to take in this atmosphere. I cannot. It is stronger than me. I cannot go. I would not go. So I advise you not to go." (Spiritual Conference at Econe, June 25, 1981)
  • “The consequences of this state of mind or spirit spread within the Church, inside the Church, are deplorable, and are ruining and sapping the spiritual vitality of the Church. In conscience, all we can do is turn priests and faithful away from using the Novus Ordo Missae if we wish that the complete and whole Catholic Faith remains still living.” (Letter to John Paul II, April 5, 1983 - Archbishop Lefebvre, Conference #1, St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary, April 24, 1983)
  • In many cases, Masses by their translation, by the intention (of the celebrant), for many reasons are probably no longer valid. But, nevertheless, personally, I have always said, in fact, that if the Mass was said according to the rite approved by Pope Paul VI, in Latin, and with the intention of doing what the Church does, and, obviously, with the (valid) matter also, by a priest who is a real Catholic priest, I think that the Mass is in effect valid, although it does not necessarily follow that because it is valid we must inevitably attend it. ...
    My judgment is, given that this [New] Mass, as I had occasion to remark when interrogated by the Holy Office, is that this Mass is a Mass which has been poisoned, and one cannot oblige a person in conscience to receive poison. Consequently, if these people do not wish to go to Mass on Sunday, for example, because they are aware that it is a poison for their souls, they are certainly not committing a mortal sin. ... 
    What we can say, objectively, as a general rule, is that it is a danger to the faith to attend such Masses. Subjectively, we must take into consideration the individual, and consequently we must know how to judge as a (good) pastor and not only purely in an objective manner, as if we had nothing to do with human beings who find themselves by consequences in diverse circumstances. ... Obviously, the orthodoxy of the priest does not change the quality or the situation of the New Mass. (Even if a priest is well intentioned, a doubtful Mass will remain doubtful.) This is what they tell me in Rome: "You say that the Mass of the Pope is not good; you say that the Mass of certain cardinals is not good." I must reply "yes," because this concerns an objective question, that this Mass was made with the help of Protestants, finalized in a spirit of ecumenical protestantism, and that the essential elements of the Mass are tainted more or less. Consequently, the faith is no longer expressed as it should be expressed, in such a way that the people finish by having an ecumenical spirit and a Protestant spirit, which is excessively dangerous. (Interview with the Houston Chronicle, May 1983)
  • "... we have the precise conviction that this new rite of Mass expresses a new faith, a faith which is not ours, a faith which is not the Catholic Faith. This New Mass is a symbol, is an expression, is an image of a new faith, of a Modernist faith. For if the most holy Church has wished to guard throughout the centuries this precious treasure which She has given us of the rite of Holy Mass which was canonized by Saint Pius V, it has not been without purpose. It is because this Mass contains our whole faith, the whole Catholic Faith: faith in the Most Holy Trinity, faith in the Divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ, faith in the Redemption of Our Lord Jesus Christ, faith in the Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ which flowed for the redemption of our sins, faith in supernatural grace, which comes to us from the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, which comes to us from the Cross, which comes to us through all the Sacraments.

    This is what we believe. This is what we believe in celebrating the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass of all time. It is a lesson of faith and at the same time a source of our faith, indispensable for us in this age when our faith is attacked from all sides. We have need of this true Mass, of this Mass of all time of this Sacrifice of Our Lord Jesus Christ really to fill our souls with the Holy Ghost and with the strength of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Now it is evident that the new rite, if I may say so, supposes another conception of the Catholic religion-another religion." (Ordination Sermon, July 29, 1976)
  • [As we], on the other hand, do not cease to affirm: the new Mass has been made in collaboration with the Protestants in order to please them; it still has a Protestant definition and produces Protestants. These reasons are more than sufficient for not giving it the titles reserved to the Catholic Mass of all time in its various rites. (Letter to Friends and Benefactors, March 1983)



The New Mass is Intrinsically Evil

  • In April 1974, before the Archbishop had reached a decision about the New Mass, he stated:
    “Is the Mass really intrinsically evil? If the Mass was intrinsically evil, intrinsically, I say, well one cannot do an intrinsically evil act, an intrinsically evil act is always forbidden: But if the Mass is not intrinsically evil, but is evil by circumstances, by what surrounds it, by certain prayers, because the Mass is not what it should be, and so as circumstances can change, can be modified, ... it is obvious that with them, I think it is better to abstain, not to go to Mass for a whole month rather than go to Masses like that, that's for sure!”
  • By June 1981, the Archbishop had reached a conclusion on the New Mass and said:
    “…that the evil in the New Mass is truly intrinsic, in the text … and not only something purely extrinsic, [in the abuses], this is certain. Precisely by this general effect which diminishes the proclamation of our faith, this diminution is present everywhere, in the words and in the actions. They wanted to be ecumenical to such a point, to bring themselves closer to the Protestants in order to pray with them, that in the end they no longer affirm the Faith. And that is very grave. This diminution is excessively grave for our faith, how can it be otherwise? … Really, in conscience, I cannot advise anyone to attend this Mass, it is not possible.” (pp. 224 in Dr. David Allen White’s, The Horn of the Unicorn).
  • Archbishop’s conferences on the New Mass on June 23/24/25, 1981:
  • “The liturgical reform consisted ultimately in taking a Protestant text, while affirming that one does not deny the truths the Protestants deny and, by virtue of the negation of these truths, they made this Novus Ordo…. the modernist liturgists who entered the Church found nothing better than to take the Protestant text and say: We do not deny the truths that the Protestants deny ... We do not deny the truths, but we take the same text, because this text has no formal heretical text! These texts were made by virtue of the negation of these truths, but they do not explicitly deny them, so they then say: We are not doing something heretical by taking these texts, but us, we do not deny the truths that the Protestants deny! ... I do not see how one can say: This [liturgical] reform is only evil in a purely accidental way, in a purely external or extrinsic way. In my opinion, the protestant reform, this Mass of Taizé is certainly evil because it no longer affirms truths … it is a poisoned mass. A poisoned mass, because when one no longer affirms the truly Catholic truths of the Mass, as the Protestants wanted, little by little faith in these truths also disappears. This, I would say, is so obvious, so obvious in all the consequences...”

    “…we cannot, in three conferences, say everything on internal characteristics, on the similarities with Protestant texts in an ecumenical spirit, and thus of the danger which the [New] Mass entails for the Faith because of this diminution of the affirmation of the faith, a diminution of the affirmation of the dogmas which are essential to the Mass.… it [the New Mass] is not formally heretical, but indirectly it favors heresy because it puts you in a climate that no longer affirms the fundamental truths of the Mass , which no longer sufficiently affirms the fundamental truths of the Holy Mass.”

    “… So, if someone asks me: “I only have Mass of St. Pius V once a month. So what should I do on the other Sundays? Should I go to the New Mass if I do not have the Mass of St. Pius V? ...

    I reply: Just because something is poisoned, obviously it is not going to poison you if you go on the odd occasion, but to go regularly on Sunday like that, little by little the notions will be lost, the dogmas will diminish. They will become accustomed to this ambiance which is no longer Catholic and they will very slowly lose the Faith in the Real Presence, lose the Faith in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, and have a spirituality, since the prayers are changed and they have modified everything, in the sense of another spirituality. It is a new conception of Christian spirituality. There is no longer any asceticism, no longer a combat against sin, no longer a spiritual combat. There is a great need to combat against our own tendencies, against our faults, against everything which leads us to sin. So I would say to them: Listen, I cannot advise you to go to something which is evil. Myself, I would not go because I would not want to take in this atmosphere. I cannot. It is stronger than me. I cannot go. I would not go. So I advise you not to go."

Print this item

  Archbishop Lefevre - On the Combat for Christ the King
Posted by: Stone - 11-19-2020, 10:00 AM - Forum: Archbishop Lefebvre [by topic] - No Replies

Quotes of Archbishop Lefebvre: On the Combat for Christ the King

  • "This century of apostasy, without doubt in a different way from the centuries of faith, belongs to Jesus Christ. On the one hand, the apostasy of the great number manifests the heroic fidelity of the small number; it was like this at the time of the prophet Elias in Israel, when God preserved only seven thousand men, who did not bend the knee before Baal [3 Kings 19:18]. Let us therefore not bend the knee before the 'cult of man' [expression of Paul VI], 'established in the sanctuary and sitting as if it were God' [2 Thess. 2:4]. Let us remain Catholics, adorers of the only true God, Our Lord Jesus Christ, with His Father and the Holy Ghost!" (Archbishop Lefebvre, They Have Uncrowned Him. Kansas City: Angelus Press 1988, p. xvii)
  • "What then is the true direction of history? Is there even a direction to history? History is all ordered to a person, who is the center of history and who is Our Lord Jesus Christ, because as St. Paul reveals it:
    'In Him all things have been established in heaven and on earth, things visible and invisible, the thrones, the dominions, the principalities, the powers, all has been created by Him and in Him, and He Himself is before all, and all things have in Him their consistency. He is he head of the body which is the Church, He who is the principle... in order that in all things He hold the first place. For God willed that all the fullness abide in Him; He has willed to reconcile through Him all things with Himself, those which are on earth and those which are in the heavens, by making peace by the blood of His cross.' [Col. 1:17-21]

    "Jesus Christ is therefore the pole of History. History has only one sole law: 'He must reign; ' if He reigns, true progress and prosperity will also reign, which are goods more spiritual than material! If He does not reign, it is decadence, decay, slavery in all its forms, the reign of the Evil One. This is what Holy Scripture promises besides: '[i]The nation and the kingdom that will not serve Thee shall perish, those nations will be entirely destroyed.[/i]' [Isaias 60:12] {Italics in the original} (Archbishop Lefebvre, [i]They Have Uncrowned Him. [/i]Kansas City: Angelus Press 1988, p. 139)
  • “The point of opposition and the reason why there is no possibility of an Agreement [with Modernist Rome] is this; the question is not so much about the Mass, because the Mass is just one consequence of them wanting to get closer to Protestantism, and so they changed the worship, sacraments, catechism, etc. The real fundamental opposition is against the Reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ! … 'Oportet Illum Regnare!' … St. Paul tells us 'Our Lord came to reign, He must reign!' They [the Modernists] say: 'NO!' We say: 'YES!' with all its consequences!” (Abp. Lefebvre, Fideliter No. 70, 1993)
  • “When someone asks if we know when there will be an accord with Rome, my answer is simple: WHEN ROME RE-CROWNS OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST. We cannot be in accord with those who uncrown Our Lord! The day WHEN THEY RECOGNIZE ONCE AGAIN OUR LORD AS KING OF ALL PEOPLES AND NATIONS, it will not be us with whom they have rejoined but the Catholic Church, in which we dwell!” (Archbishop Lefebvre, 1988, Fideliter, No. 68 p. 16)
  • “All those Conciliar Fathers who gave their vote to Dignitatis Humanae and proclaimed Religious Liberty with Paul VI, did they realize that they had in fact uncrowned Our Lord Jesus Christ by tearing away the crown of His Social Royalty? Did they grasp that they had very concretely dethroned Our Lord Jesus Christ from the throne of His Divinity? Did they understand that, making themselves the echo of the apostate nations, they were making those abominable blasphemies rise up towards His throne: We do not want Him to rule over us; We have no king but Caesar?” (Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, They Have Uncrowned Him. Kansas City: Angelus Press, 2003, pp. 211-212)
  • “There will be possibly other manifestations of putting the brakes on by the Vatican; and it is very, very dangerous for us to "rally" ourselves now. No rallying, no rallying to the liberals; no rallying to the ecclesiastics who are governing in the Church now and who are liberals; there is no rallying to these people. From the moment when we rally ourselves, this rallying will be the acceptance of the liberal principles. We cannot do this, even if certain appeasements are given us on the Mass of St. Pius V - certain satisfactions, certain recognitions, certain incardinations, which could even be offered to you eventually... They must give us back everything. They must give up their liberalism, they must come back to the real truth of the Church, to the faith of the Church, to the basic principles of the Church, of this total dependence of society, of families, of individuals on Our Lord Jesus Christ! At that moment when they give us the Mass of all times, very well, then, we are completely in agreement. Then there will be a perfect understanding, we will be able to be recognized, and we will have no more scruples. But as long as one is dealing with people who have made this agreement with the Devil, with liberal ideas, we cannot have any confidence. They will string us along little by little; they will try to catch us in their traps, as long as they have not let go of these false ideas.” (Conference of Archbishop Lefebvre to the priests of the District of France. Dec. 13, 1984)
  • “If ever there were a willingness from Rome to resume discussions, this time, I will be the one to set down the conditions. As Cardinal Oddi said, “Archbishop Lefebvre is in a strong position.” That is why I will demand that the discussions concern doctrinal points. They have to stop with their Ecumenism, they have to bring back the true meaning of the Mass, restore the true definition of the Church, bring back the Catholic meaning of Collegiality, and so on. I expect from them a Catholic, and not a liberal, definition of Religious Liberty. They must accept the encyclical Quas Primas on Christ the King, and the Syllabus (Pius IX). They must accept all this, because this is from now on the condition determining all new discussions between us and them.” (Interview for Controverses, 1989)
  • Fideliter: But there are traditionalists who have made an agreement with Rome without conceding anything.
    Archbishop Lefebvre: "That is false. They have waived their opportunity to oppose Rome. They must remain silent because of the favors that have been granted. Then they start to slip ever so slowly until they end up admitting the errors of Vatican II. It is a very dangerous situation. Such concessions [by] Rome aim only to get the break with the SSPX traditionalists and submit to Rome." (Interview with Fideliter Magazine No. 79, January 1991, shortly before his death in March 1991)
  • “… supposing that Rome calls for a renewed dialogue, then, I will put in conditions. I shall not accept being in the position I was put in during the dialogue. No more. I will place the discussion at the doctrinal level: “Do you agree with the great encyclicals of all the popes who preceded you? Do you agree with Quanta Cura of Pius IX, Immortale Dei and Libertas of Leo X III, Pascendi Gregis of Pius X, Quas Primas of Pius XI, Humani Generis of Pius XII? Are you in full communion with the popes and their teachings? Do you still accept the entire Anti- Modernist Oath? Are you in favor of the social reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ? If you do not accept the doctrine of your predecessors, it is useless to talk! As long as you do not accept the correction of the Council, in consideration of the doctrine of the these popes, your predecessors, no dialogue is possible. It is useless. Thus, the positions will be clear.” (Archbishop Lefebvre, Interview with Fideliter Magazine, Nov.-Dec. 1988)
  • We want to remain united to Jesus Christ, as the Vatican has dethroned the Lord. We want to remain faithful to our Lord King, Prince and Ruler of the world. We cannot change anything in this line of conduct.” (Archbishop Lefebvre, Flavigny, conference, Dec. 1988)
  • "We must build again the Social Reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ in this Christian world which is disappearing. You shall tell me: "But, Monseigneur, this is the fight of David against Goliath!" Yes, indeed, I know. But in his fight against Goliath, David won the victory! How did he win the victory? By a little pebble which he took from the torrent. What is this little stone which we have? Jesus Christ! Our Lord Jesus Christ! We shall say with our ancestors from Vendée:
    "We have no other honor than the honor of Jesus Christ. We have no other fear in the world than to offend Jesus Christ!" They went to their death to defend their God singing this! We also, let us sing with courage, wholeheartedly: "We have no other love than Our Lord Jesus Christ, no other fear than to offend Him!" (Archbishop Lefebvre, 60th Ordination Anniversary Sermon, 1989)

  • "Do not be surprised if we do not come to an understanding with Rome. This is not possible while Rome will not return to faith in the Reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ ... We collided on a point of the Catholic Faith." (Sierre Conference on November 27, 1988; Fideliter No 89)
  • We want to remain united to Jesus Christ, as the Vatican has dethroned the Lord. We want to remain faithful to our Lord King, Prince and Ruler of the world. We cannot change anything in this line of conduct.” (Archbishop Lefebvre, Flavigny, conference, Dec. 1988)

  • "It had to take all the frenzy of the enemies of Jesus Christ to bring them to the point of tearing away His crown, when, in application of the Council of 1962, the innovators suppressed or truncated these three strophes of the hymn from the Vespers of Christ the King:

    The wicked mob screams out,
    "We don't want Christ as King,"
    While we, with shouts of joy, hail
    Thee as the world's supreme King.

    May the rulers of the world
    Publicly honor and extol Thee;
    May the teachers and judges reverence Thee.
    May the laws express Thy order and the arts reflect Thy beauty.

    May kings find renown
    In their submission and dedication to Thee.
    Bring under Thy gentle rule
    Our country and our homes.

    -(Archbishop Lefebvre, They Have Uncrowned Him. Kansas City: Angelus Press 1988, pp. 96-97)
  • "At the risk of repeating myself, I come back to the social kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ, that dogma of the Catholic faith, which no one can put into doubt without being a heretic: yes, exactly: a heretic!" [Italics in the original]  (Archbishop Lefebvre, They Have Uncrowned Him. Kansas City: Angelus Press 1988, p. 99)
  • "So it is essential for us to have the conviction of this truth of faith: everything, including civil society, has been devised to serve, directly or indirectly, the redeeming plan of Our Lord Jesus Christ." (Archbishop Lefebvre, They Have Uncrowned Him. Kansas City: Angelus Press 1988, p. 101)
  • It is with that that the Holy Ghost inspired the Apostles: the reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ. He is King! He has the right to reign. . .He has the right! And it is an historical fact - His presence in history can no longer be ignored by men; no man can ignore that Our Lord came to save him. And those who know that Our Lord came and, consequently, that God came among men to save us, must accept His reign: the reign of Our Lord. Not only His reign in individuals, in all persons; not only His reign in each one of us: but His reign in the family, in the home. . . but His reign in the State! Ah, here it is something much more difficult: to admit that Our Lord ought to reign over the nations. He is the King of all nations! He it is who will judge - who will judge all princes and kings. (Archbishop Lefebvre, Sermon of Pentecost Sunday 1975)
  • What is this modern man? Who is he? What does he represent, if not often the man who does not believe in Our Lord Jesus Christ, and who does not want to believe in Our Lord Jesus Christ. . .who refuses the reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ. . .who refuses His grace? Men no longer want to believe in the supernatural; they no longer want to believe in the grace of Our Lord. They now believe only in man - in man, who now by his science seems to want to govern the world in the place of God. As for us, we affirm the contrary: the reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ. We want Him to reign: and that is why we adore Him, and seek to adore Him in a manner worthy of Him, worthy of His presence in the Holy Eucharist. That is why we love our ceremonies, why we are attached to this Liturgy which truly expresses what we think in our hearts, what we think in the depths of our souls: that Jesus is present in the Holy Eucharist and that we honour Him as God. He is our King: He has the right to our reverences, He has the right to our genuflections, He has the right to our bows; He has the right to songs worthy of Him, worthy of heaven, which recall the chant of the angels. (Ibid.)
  • We are attacked because we want the reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the social reign of Our Lord Jesus Christ; because we affirm as much, because we do all that this reign might be established - that the reign of God, the reign of Our Lord might be established, the reign as well of the Blessed Virgin Mary. That is why we are persecuted; we know it well. (Ibid.)
  • We must refuse to compromise with those who deny the divinity of Our Lord, or with any false ecumenism. We must fight against atheism and laicism in order to help Our Lord to reign over families and over society. We must protect the worship of the Church, the Sacrifice of the Mass, and the sacraments instituted by Our Lord, practicing them according to the rites honored by twenty centuries of tradition.Thus we will properly honor Our Lord, and thus be assured of receiving His grace. ... It is because the novelties which have invaded the Church since the Council diminish the adoration and the honor due to Our Lord, and implicitly throw doubt upon His divinity, that we refuse them. These novelties do not come from the Holy Ghost, nor from His Church, but from those who are imbued with the spirit of Modernism, and with all the errors which convey this spirit, condemned with so much courage and energy by St. Pius X. This holy Pope said to the bishops of France with regard to the Sillon movement: “The true friends of the people are neither revolutionaries nor innovators, but the men of tradition.”(Letter to Friends and Benefactors, April 1980)
  • His reign must be established on earth as it is in heaven. It is He himself who said so in the prayer that he taught us, the Our Father: “Thy kingdom come, thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven”. And this must be the object of our prayers, the intention of our sufferings, and the purpose of our life. We must have no rest until Our Lord’s reign is established. A Catholic whose heart is not animated by this profound desire is not a Catholic. He is not one of the faithful of Our Lord Jesus Christ. It suffices to re-read these lines “Now at last in these times He has spoke to us, with a Son to speak for Him; a Son whom He has appointed to inherit all things, just as it was through Him that He created this world of time” (Heb, 1:2). (Archbishop Lefebvre, The Mass of All Time, Chapter 5: Angelus Press 2007, as quoted from here.)
  • Our Lord Jesus Christ is King now. All power has been given to Him in heaven and on earth. “Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven,” says Our Lord. If, then, Our Lord’s will must be done on earth , it means that His law, the Decalogue, must be applied on earth as it is in heaven. We must profess this even if churchmen want no more of it. This what is dividing the Church at present . As for us, we want Our Lord’s honour and the social kingship of Our Lord Jesus Christ, which must be applied universally. We will fight for this, and we will do our utmost to crown Jesus Christ King. Because we speak of the social reign of Our Lord, we are accused of engaging in politics, then we want to do so, because we want Our Lord Jesus Christ to rule over us. We do not want to be governed by men who are not subject to Our Lord. If only all our rulers understood that they must be subject to Our Lord Jesus Christ, who is the King of Kings, the Lord of lords! He is the King. He could have been the King on earth and continue to govern us. But He will be one day, when He descends upon the clouds in the heavens. Everyone will have to render and account to this King and Judge. (Ibid.)
  • Meanwhile, today, we want authorities, leaders, who know that they will render an account to God for the exercise of their power and their government. For we love to be subject to persons who do not believe themselves to be the authors of all power. Even if they have been elected by the people, the people do not have power; the people are not God. The people can designate the one who will exercise authority, but it does not give the authority; authority comes from God: “there is no power but from God,” says St Paul (Rom.13:1). This is the greatness of authority. This is the true foundation of the power of authority, whether civil or paternal. Paternal authority comes from God. Children know that when they are subject to their parents, they are at the same time subject to God. How beautiful this is; how well God has made things! But how men destroy them! (Ibid.)
  • We do not want to be subject uniquely to men who will do with us what they will. We would not be allowed to think except as these men think. We would not be allowed to act except as these men want us to act. No, we want to be subject to God, yes, we are willing to be subject. That is what we think and what we want. We want to belong to Our Lord Jesus Christ, who is our King. (Ibid.)


Quotes from Other Clergy on the Combat for the Reign of Christ the King
  • "The heresy of our time is the rejection of the social reign of Jesus Christ. From all sides the cry of the Gospel parable resounds: "Nolumus hunc regnare super nos.–We will not have this man to reign over us." Not only are laws no longer made in His name or in conformity with His Gospel, they are made against Him. He is the enemy, and war is declared against Him from every side in the domains of doctrine and action..... (Buatier, Sacrifice in Catholic Dogma [French], p. 114)
  • Meanwhile, He exercises over all nations the royal power, which he received, as Man, on the Day of his Ascension. He redeemed us all by his Blood; we are therefore his people, and he is our King. He is, and he calls himself, King of Kings and Lord of Lords. (Apocalypse 19:16) The kings of the earth reign not either by their own prowess, or by the boasted social compact; they lawfully reign by Christ alone. Peoples and nations are not their own masters; they belong to Christ and are his subjects. His law requires no sanction from man; it is above all human laws, and should be their guide and controller. Why have the nations raged, and the people devised vain things? The kings of the earth stood up, and the princes met together, against the Lord and against his Christ. They said: Let us break their bonds asunder, and let us cast away their yoke from us. (Psalm 2:1-3) How vain all these efforts! for, as the Apostle says, he must reign, until he hath put all his enemies under his feet, (1 Corinthians 15:25) that is, until his second coming, when the pride of man and Satan’s power shall both be at an end.

    "Thus, then, the Son of Man, crowned at his Ascension, must reign over the world to the end of time. But, it will be objected: “How can he be said to reign in these our times, when Kings and Emperors and Presidents acknowledge that their authority comes from the people; and when the people themselves, carried away with the ideas of self-government and liberty and independence, have lost all idea of authority?” And yet, he reigns; he reigns in his justice, since men refused to be guided by his clemency. They expunged his law from their statutes; they gave the rights of citizenship to error and blasphemy: then did he deliver them up, both people and rulers, to their own follies and lies. Authority and power are become ephemeral: and as they scorn to receive the consecration of the Church, the hand that holds them to-day, may be empty tomorrow. Then anarchy, then a new ruler, and then a fresh revolution. This will be the future, as it is the present, history of Nations, until they once more acknowledge Jesus as their King, and resume the constitution of the ages of faith: “It is Christ that conquers! it is Christ that reigns! it is Christ that commands! May Christ preserve his people from all evil!” - Dom Prosper Gueranger, The Liturgical Year, Sunday within the Octave of the Ascension

  • Were the Church’s plight a hundred times worse, a hundred times more cruel, it is still the Lord who is forever Master and King. It is to Him that all power has been given; it is before Him that every knee must bow in heaven, on earth, and under the earth, including those in this kind of hell, for the moment painless, which is the modernist sect. Its harmfulness cannot extend beyond the strict limits set by the Lord, and the Lord only grants it a certain power to obscure, to falsify, and to scandalize in thousands of ways, only for the good of the elect and to augment the gracious splendor of His Church. We ought not to be fearful, but rather persevere with confidence in the Church of always, the everlasting Church, the Church of all time. (Fr. Roger Calmel,  Apologia, Itinéraires, No. 151, March 1971, pp. 104-111.)

Print this item

  Quotes of Archbishop Lefebvre - Index
Posted by: Stone - 11-19-2020, 09:47 AM - Forum: Archbishop Lefebvre [by topic] - No Replies

A Collection of Quotes from Archbishop Lefebvre
[As one can imagine, this list is in no way comprehensive.]


Before one begins to read these great, clear words of the Archbishop, please keep in mind the praise his private theologian
at the Second Vatican Council, Fr. Berto, said of him:

"Archbishop Lefebvre is a theologian, and by far superior to his own theologian, and God grant that all the [Council] Fathers might be theologians to the same degree as he is! He has a perfectly sure and refined theological habitus, to which his very great devotion to the Holy See adds that connaturality that allows him, even before discursive thinking intervenes, to discern intuitively what is and what is not compatible with the prerogatives of the Rock of the Church."


Index

On the Combat for Christ the King

On the New Mass

On the Indult

On the Second Vatican Council

On the Modern Orientation

The Conciliar Church

The Modernists in Rome Cannot be Trusted

On Freemasonry in the Church

On Ecumenism

On Obedience

Against Sedevacantism

On the New Oath of Fidelity which includes a New Profession of Faith

On the New Code of Canon Law

On Papal Infallibility

Against False Shepherds

On the Doubtfulness of the Conciliar Sacraments

On Collegiality



These quotes of the Archbishop were initially compiled and generously 'donated' by the forum member, Pulcheria.
We are very grateful for this gift!

"The Necessity of Religious Instruction"
from The Catechism of the Council of Trent

BUT while the preaching of the divine Word should never be interrupted in the Church, surely in these, our days, it becomes necessary to labor with more than ordinary zeal and piety to nourish and strengthen the faithful with sound and wholesome doctrine, as with the food of life. For false prophets have gone forth into the world to corrupt the faithful with various and strange doctrines, of whom the Lord has said: "I did not send prophets, yet they ran; I spoke not to them, yet they prophesied."

In this work, to such extremes has their impiety, practiced in all the arts of Satan, been carried, that it would seem almost impossible to confine it within any bounds; and did we not rely on the splendid promises of the Savior, Who declared that He had built His Church on so solid a foundation that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it, we should have good reason to fear lest, beset on every side by such a host of enemies and assailed and attacked by so many machinations, it would, in these days, fall to the ground.

[align=left]For those who intended to corrupt the minds of the faithful, knowing that they could not hold immediate personal intercourse with all, and thus pour into their ears their poisoned doctrines, adopted another plan which enabled them to disseminate error and impiety more easily and extensively. Besides those voluminous works by which they sought the subversion of the Catholic faith—to guard against which (volumes) required perhaps little labor or circumspection, since their contents were clearly heretical—they also composed innumerable smaller books which, veiling their errors under the semblance of piety, deceived with incredible facility the unsuspecting minds of simple folk.

Print this item

  False Resistance by Topic
Posted by: Stone - 11-19-2020, 09:41 AM - Forum: True vs. False Resistance - No Replies

False Resistance

This list is meant to serve as a simple cataloging of posts - by topic -  of the errors of the False Resistance. Please pray for these priests and bishops, who seem to have lost their way.

“Instaurare omnia in Christo: to Restore all things in Christ”


Summary of Bishop Williamson's Teachings
Bishop Williamson's Teachings [as of April 2017]
Quotes of Bp. Williamson supporting the new religion and conciliarism
Fr. Hewko: The Errors of Bishops Williamson, Aquinas, and Zendejas
Bishop Williamson Promotes Grave Errors in Interview August 2022


New Mass
Grace vs. No Grace in the New Mass
Fake Resistance Watch - The Recusant
Could Bishop Williamson take this oath today?
Authority, Religious Liberty, and the New Mass
Defending the Indefensible


Conciliar Church is the Catholic Church
Bishop Williamson believes in the Conciliar Church
Bp. Williamson: Outside the Church there is no salvation?
BW's Official Church is Official Hypocrisy
Bishop Williamson: More Novus Ordo Madness!
Bp. Williamson advises attending the Indult mass and other contaminated Masses


Ecumenism
Fake Resistance Watch - The Recusant
Trad-Ecumenism: Dominicans of Avrille
Bp. Williamson: Orthodoxes are Followers of Christ
Bishop Williamson condemns himself in EC #548
Factions colliding inside the trad-ecumenist Fake resistance
Bishop Williamson further extends his ecumenism—this time to the Anglicans


Eucharistic Miracles
Bp. Williamson: More Novus Ordo Madness!
The New Mass and New Mass Miracles
Holy Scripture condemns the false N.O. Eucharistic miracles
Bp. Williamson makes the N.O. Miracles a Condition of Holy Oils


Sedevacantism
Fr. Ringrose Accepts Sedevacantism
Fr. Chazal vs Fr. Cekada - sedeprivitionist vs sedevacantist
Bishop Williamson against sedevacantism?
Fr. Kramer Explained – Email Exchange


Lack of Structure
Chaos Organized, The Plan of Bishop Williamson
The Church imposes the Responsibility of Organizing itself
Bp. Williamson Said He Wants NOTHING with the "Resistance"
BW's Trumpet out of Tune
Broadstairs - A Religion of Music
Factions colliding inside the trad-ecumenist Fake resistance
Formless, disorganized resistance: Encouraging words from BW


Clergy & Lay Members/SAJM
For the Select Few - Schedules of the False Resistance
SAJM website deleted
CI morning laughter…
Faux-pas priests Turning Against Bishop Williamson
Seven Bishops: the Pontius Pilate of Tradition
SAJM: An Approved Congregation or Illegally Erected?
A Closer Look At Fr. Zendejas's "Blue Paper" No.300, November 2015
Bp. Zendejas says again Novus Ordo errors are from reforms
Confusion continues in Bishop Thomas Aquinas


Bishop Williamson 'Worship'
Honor and Glory to Bishop Williamson
Sanctimonious Miter
Bp. Williamson in Damage Control
Chaos Organized, The Plan of Bishop Williamson
The mindset of the False Resistance
The Recusant: Open Letter to Fr. Juan Carlos Ortiz


Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer [post 2019]
Video & Transcript for November Conference 2018 on Bishop Ambrose
OLMC focuses again on validity only?
OLMC et al.: Fr. Hewko, Fr. Poisson, Bp. Timlin and the Pope
Fr. Hewko, Fr. Poisson, Bp. Timlin and the Pope
This is really not about Fr. Hewko ...
Is Fr. Joseph Pfeiffer Still Part of the True Resistance?
Fr. Pfeiffer's New Path
On the 'Consecration' of 'Bishop' Joseph Pfeiffer - Fr. Hewko and Fr. Ruiz
Ten Questions for Fr. Pfeiffer - The Recusant



Contra Archbishop Lefebvre
Archbishop Lefebvre - The Conciliar Church has Corrupted the Sources of Grace [The Mass and the Sacraments]
The New Mass and the Oath SSPX Priests Take at Ordination
Bishop Williamson: More Novus Ordo Madness!
Fr. MacDonald: The Friendship of Pilate and Herod
'This is why we have a Fake Resistance' - Operation Sabotage!
Archbishop Lefebvre - On the Thuc line bishops
Fr. Cardozo Sermon [2016]: On the Errors of Bishop Williamson

Print this item

  Advent Hymn - Veni, Veni Emmanuel
Posted by: Stone - 11-19-2020, 09:37 AM - Forum: Advent - No Replies

Print this item

  Advent Hymn - Veni O Sapientia
Posted by: Stone - 11-19-2020, 09:36 AM - Forum: Advent - No Replies

Print this item

  Advent Hymn - Alma Redemtoris Mater
Posted by: Stone - 11-19-2020, 09:35 AM - Forum: Advent - Replies (1)

To Our Lady:

Print this item

  Advent Hymn - Vox clara ecce intonat
Posted by: Stone - 11-19-2020, 09:32 AM - Forum: Advent - No Replies

Advent [Ambrosian] Hymn - 5th or 6th c.



[Image: 46-Lo_Now_Thrilling.jpg]

Print this item

  Advent Hymn - Alme Siderum
Posted by: Stone - 11-19-2020, 09:28 AM - Forum: Advent - No Replies

Creator Of The Stars Of Night "Alme Siderum" (Traditional Advent Hymn)
Advent Hymn from Ambrosian, 6th or 7th Century
Latin

Conditor alme siderum, aeterna lux credentium,
Christe, redemptor omnium, exaudi preces supplicum.

Qui condolens interitu mortis perire saeculum,
salvasti mundum languidum, donans reis remedium.

Vergente mundi vespere, uti sponsus de thalamo,
egressus honestissima Virginis matris clausula.

Cuius forti potentiae genu curvantur omnia;
caelestia, terrestria nutu fatentur subdita.

Te, Sancte, fide quaesumus, venture iudex saeculi,
conserva nos in tempore hostis a telo perfidi.

Sit, Christe, rex piissime,
tibi Patrique gloria
cum Spiritu Paraclito,
in sempiterna saecula. Amen.


English

Creator of the stars of night, Thy people’s everlasting Light;
Jesu, Redeemer, save us all, And hear thy servants when they call.

Thou, grieving that the ancient curse
Should doom to death an universe,
Hast found the med’cine, full of grace,
To save and heal a ruin’d race.

Thou cam’st, the Bridegroom of the Bride,
As drew the world to evening-tide;
Proceeding from a Virgin shrine,
The spotless Victim all divine.

At whose dread Name, majestic now,
All knees must bend, all hearts must bow
And things celestial thee shall own,
And things terrestrial, Lord alone.

O thou, whose coming is with dread
To judge and doom the quick and dead,
Preserve us, while we dwell below,
From ev’ry insult of the foe.

To God the Father, God the Son,
And God the Spirit, Three in One,
Laud, honour, might, and glory be
From age to age eternally. Amen.

Print this item

  Ordinations 29 June 1982 - Contra Sedevacantism
Posted by: Stone - 11-19-2020, 08:11 AM - Forum: Sermons and Conferences - Replies (1)

Homily 29 June 1982 
Ordination Sermon
[Contra Sedevacantism]



My dear friends,

Once again we are gathered here at Ec6ne for the very moving ceremony of the Ordination of Priests. If there is one ceremony which lets us live the most sublime moments of the Church, it is the ceremony of priestly ordination. It brings to mind especially the Last Supper, when Our Lord Jesus Christ ordained His Apostles. It recalls also the out pouring of the Holy Ghost on the Apostles at Pentecost. So the Church continues, the Holy Ghost continues to extend Himself through the hands of the successors of the Apostles. We are happy to be able today to confer ordination on thirteen new priests.

There was not supposed to be an ordination of priests this year, because the course of studies has been changed from five to six years, and the results of the change were to come into effect in 1982. But special circumstances dictate that we ordain today (besides the new priests) seven deacons for the Society and six others from various groups allied to us, fighting the same fight, with the same convictions and the same love of the Church. The day before yesterday I conferred priestly ordination on two members of the Society for the District of Germany, making a total of fifteen for this year.

We hope, with the grace of God, as the years go by and the numbers increase, that our seminaries, especially in Germany and the United States, will yield the fruits of the seeds planted in preceding years. The first ordinations at Ridgefield, U.S.A., will take place next year with three new priests. They have already taken place at Zaitzkofen, Germany. Let us pray that God will bless these seminaries and give those who are studying for the priesthood the many graces they need.

My dear friends, in a few minutes you will be ordained priests. You know, I am sure, today more than ever, that ordination will put you into the very heart of the work of redemption of Our Lord Jesus Christ. By His Sacrifice on the Cross, Our Lord set Himself to create priests, to create a share in His eternal Priesthood for those He chose to prolong His Sacrifice, the source of the graces of the Redemption, because it is the great work of God. God created everything to be redeemed. This is His great work of love.

For this He created everything the world which we see around us. He did it by the Cross. He did it for the redemption of souls. He did it by the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. He did it for priests. He did it so that souls could be united to Him, especially as Victim in the Holy Eucharist. He gives Himself to us as Victim, so that we may offer our own lives with His, and thus share not only in our own redemption, but also in that of others.

This plan of God, this thought of God which brought the world into being, is a most extraordinary thing. We are astonished at this great mystery which Almighty God has brought into being here below. And precisely because the sacrifice of Our Lord is at the heart of the Church, at the heart of our salvation, at the heart of our souls, everything touching on the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass touches us profoundly, touches each one of us, personally, because we must participate in the Holy Sacrifice for the salvation of our souls, because we must receive the Blood of Jesus by baptism and the other sacraments, especially the Sacrament of the Altar, in order to save our souls.

This is why we are so attached to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass - the more so as they want to change it and make it (so they say) more acceptable to those who are not of our faith, who do not have the Catholic Faith. All these changes in the last few years in the most precious thing in the Church, the Liturgy, have been made to bring us closer to our separated brethren, that is to say, to those who are not of our Faith.

So our hearts are troubled, our minds and our faith are aroused. We ask ourselves: "How can they water down this truth, the greatest, most mysterious, most beautiful, most divine thing in our Church, the Holy Roman Catholic Church, to bring it down to the level of heretics?" We don't understand; and in this spirit, we ask ourselves how clerics were brought into the Church with ideas that are not those of the Church, not truly fortified by the Holy Ghost, not filled with the spirit of truth, but with the spirit of error and could get to the highest levels in the Church and put through these reforms which are destroying the Church. What a mystery!

How can it be? How could Almighty God allow it? How could Our Lord make these promises to Peter and his successors, to the church and to all the successors of the Apostles, and then allow this state of affairs we see before us today? Blessed those faithful who came before us and did not have such problems to face and resolve!

Briefly, I would like to try to explain what it seems to me our course of action should be in the face of these sad developments taking place in the Church. It seems to me that we can compare this agony the Church is suffering today to the Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ. You see how astonished the Apostles themselves were when Our Lord was taken and bound after the kiss of Judas. He is taken away. He is clothed in a scarlet robe, mocked, beaten, weighed down with the Cross. And the Apostles run away; they are scandalized. It is not possible that He Whom Peter proclaimed: "Thou art the Christ, the Son of God"- can be reduced to this plight, this humiliation, this destruction. It cannot be. They run away.

Only the Virgin Mary, with St. John and some women remain with Our Lord and keep the faith. They will not abandon Him. They know that Our Lord is truly God, but they also know that He is man. It is precisely this union of the Divinity with the Humanity of Our Lord that poses extraordinary difficulties. Our Lord in fact did not want to be merely man; He wanted to be a man like us, with all the results of sin yet without sin, apart from sin; but He wanted to accept all the consequences: sadness, fatigue, suffering, thirst, hunger, death. Yes, right up to His death, Our Lord embodied this extraordinary thing that so scandalized the Apostles, as it indeed scandalized many others who turned their backs on Our Lord and did not believe in the divinity of Our Lord.

Throughout the history of the Church, one comes across these people who are so surprised at the weakness of Our Lord that they cannot believe He is God. This was the case with Arius. Arius said no, it won't do, that man cannot be God, because He said He was less than His Father, that His Father was greater than He. He is therefore less than His Father. He is therefore not God. And then Our Lord said that astonishing thing, "My soul is sorrowful, even unto death." How could He, with the Beatific Vision, seeing God in His human soul, and thus far more glorious than weak, far more eternal than temporal His soul already in eternity and blessed yet here He is, saying, "My soul is sorrowful, even unto death," and goes on to utter those astonishing words we could never imagine on the lips of Our Lord, "My God, my God, why hast Thou abandoned Me?" Hence the scandal, alas, which spreads among weak so uls. Arius takes practically the entire Church with him in saying this Man is not God.

Others, on the other hand, go the other way and say that perhaps everything Our Lord endured, spilling blood, the wounds, the Cross, all that was imaginary. They were external phenomena but not real. Rather like the archangel Raphael, when he went with Tobias and later revealed to him, "'You thought I was eating when 1 had dinner with you, but I am nourished with a spiritual nourishment." The archangel Raphael did riot have a body like that of Our Lord Jesus Christ. He was not born of an earthly mother, as our Lord was born of the Virgin Mary. Was Our Lord an illusion like that and only appeared to eat, but did not really eat, or appear to suffer but did not really suffer? There were those who denied the human nature of Our Lord Jesus Christ: the Monophysites, the Monothelites, who denied the human nature and the human will of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Everything about Him was God (they claimed), and everything that seemed to happen was only an illusion.

So you see what happens to those who are scandalized by reality and truth. Let me make a comparison with the Church of today. We thought the Church was truly divine, that she could never deceive herself or deceive us.

Well, it is true, the Church is divine; She cannot lose the Truth. The Church will always be the guardian of Truth. But She is also human. The Church is human and indeed more human than Our Lord Jesus Christ was. Our Lord could not sin. He is the Holy One, the Just One par excellence.

The Church, if she is divine and truly divine, transmits to us all the things of God, especially the Holy Eucharist - eternal things which can never change and which will be the glory of our souls in heaven. Yes, the Church is divine, but she is human too. She is made up of men who may be sinners, indeed, who are sinners, and yet who share somehow in the divinity of the Church, to a certain extent like the Pope, for example, by his infallibility; by the charism of infallibility he shares in the divinity of the Church and yet remains human. They all remain sinners. Except in those instances where the Pope makes use of his charism of infallibility, he can err, he can sin.

Why be scandalized and say, like some people following the example of Arius, that he is not pope? He is not Pope, as Arius said Christ was not God, it cannot be, Our Lord cannot be God. We ourselves may be tempted to say that it cannot be, he cannot be Pope and do what he is doing.

On the other hand, others would divinize the Church to the point that everything in it becomes perfect. So everything in the Church being perfect, we could say there is no question of our doing anything whatever to oppose anything coming out of Rome; we must accept everything coming out of Rome. Those who talk this way are like those who say that Our Lord was God to such an extent that He could not suffer, that He gave only the illusion of suffering, but in reality did not suffer; in reality it was not His blood that flowed. Those around Him had only illusions in their eyes not reality. There are some of these today who go on saying there can be nothing human, nothing imperfect in the Church. They too are mistaken. They do not see the reality of things. How far can imperfection in the Church go, how high can sin go, if I may say it, in the Church, sin in the intellect, sin in the soul, sin in the heart and in the will? The facts tell us.

As I said a moment ago, we would never have dared to put on the lips of Our Lord the words, "My God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?" So too, we would never have thought that evil and error could penetrate so deeply into the Church. But we are living in this age; we cannot shut our eyes. The facts are there; it is not merely a subjective impression. We are witnesses of what is happening in the Church, of the terrible things that have happened since the Council, the ruins piling up day after day, year after year, in Holy Church. The more we go on, the more the errors spread and the more the faithful lose the Catholic Faith. A recent study in France shows that hardly more than two million French Catholics are still really Catholic.

We are nearing the end. Everyone will fall into heresy. Everyone will fall into error because wicked clergy, as St. Pius X predicted, have found their way into the Church and occupied it. They have spread errors from the positions of authority they occupy in the Church.

Are we then required to follow error because it comes from someone in authority? No more than we should obey parents who are unworthy and ask us to do unworthy things, no more should we obey those who ask us to abandon our Faith and to abandon all Tradition. This is out of the question. Oh, of course, all this is a mystery, a great mystery, this union of the divine with the human.

The Church is divine, and the Church is human. How far can human weakness how shall I say overshadow the divinity of the church? Only God knows. It is a great mystery. We see the facts; we must put ourselves in full view of the facts and never abandon the Church, the Roman Catholic Church, never abandon her, never abandon the successor of Peter, because through him we are united to Our Lord Jesus Christ, through the Bishop of Rome, the successor of Peter. But if, by some misfortune, under the influence of some spirit or other, or some weakness or pressure, or through neglect, he abandons his duty and leads us along roads which make us lose our faith, well, we must not follow, although at the same time we recognize that he is Peter and if he speaks with the charism of infallibility, we must accept his teaching, but when he does not speak with the charism of infallibility, he may very well be mistaken alas! It is not the first time that something like this has happened in history.

We are deeply troubled, deeply anguished, we who love the Church so much and venerate her and have always venerated her. This is why this seminary exists, for love of the Church Catholic and Roman. This is why all seminaries exist. Our love of the Church has been badly bruised to think that her servants, alas, are not her servants any longer and render her no service at all. We must pray, we must sacrifice and, we must, like Mary, stay at the foot of the Cross and not abandon Our Lord Jesus Christ, even if He seems, as the Scriptures, say, "as it were accursed" on the Cross. Well, the Virgin Mary had the faith and she saw beyond the wounds, beyond the pierced Heart. She saw God in her Son, her Divine Son.

We too, in spite of the wounds in the Church, in spite of the difficulties, the persecution which we are enduring, even from those in authority in the Church, let us not abandon the Church, let us love the Holy Church our mother, let us serve her always in spite of the authorities, if necessary. In spite of these authorities who wrongly persecute us, let us stay on the same road, let us keep to the same path: we want to support the Holy Roman Catholic Church, we want to keep it going and we will keep it going by means of the priesthood of Our Lord Jesus Christ, by the true sacraments of Our Lord Jesus Christ, by the true catechism.

Why, my dear friends?

You see, I was ordained in the traditional, immemorial Mass myself and all my colleagues, up to a certain age - they received the power to celebrate the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass in this immemorial Roman Rite. Remember that: I was ordained in this rite and I do not want to leave it, I do not wish to abandon it. It is the Mass for which I was ordained and for which I wish to continue living. It is truly the Mass of the Roman Catholic Church.

Be faithful, faithful to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. It will give you so many consolations, so many joys, so much support in your troubles, in your trials, in the persecutions you may well undergo. You will find the strength with Our Lord Jesus Christ to endure all these insults; you will find this strength in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. In truly giving Our Lord Jesus Christ His Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity to the faithful, you will give them also the courage to stay with the Church in her tradition and to model themselves on all the saints who have gone before, all who have been canonized, beatified, held up as examples of holiness in Holy Church. They will continue to be our models.

May the Virgin Mary in particular be our model. Let us ask her to make of you, my dear friends, holy priests, priests such as she wishes. If you invoke her throughout your life, she will protect you and will make of you priests according to the heart of Our Lord Jesus Christ, her Divine Son.


In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

Print this item

  Ordinations 29 June 1982 - Contra Sedevacantism
Posted by: Stone - 11-19-2020, 08:11 AM - Forum: Sedevacantism - No Replies

Homily 29 June 1982 
Ordination Sermon
[Contra Sedevacantism]



My dear friends,

Once again we are gathered here at Ec6ne for the very moving ceremony of the Ordination of Priests. If there is one ceremony which lets us live the most sublime moments of the Church, it is the ceremony of priestly ordination. It brings to mind especially the Last Supper, when Our Lord Jesus Christ ordained His Apostles. It recalls also the out pouring of the Holy Ghost on the Apostles at Pentecost. So the Church continues, the Holy Ghost continues to extend Himself through the hands of the successors of the Apostles. We are happy to be able today to confer ordination on thirteen new priests.

There was not supposed to be an ordination of priests this year, because the course of studies has been changed from five to six years, and the results of the change were to come into effect in 1982. But special circumstances dictate that we ordain today (besides the new priests) seven deacons for the Society and six others from various groups allied to us, fighting the same fight, with the same convictions and the same love of the Church. The day before yesterday I conferred priestly ordination on two members of the Society for the District of Germany, making a total of fifteen for this year.

We hope, with the grace of God, as the years go by and the numbers increase, that our seminaries, especially in Germany and the United States, will yield the fruits of the seeds planted in preceding years. The first ordinations at Ridgefield, U.S.A., will take place next year with three new priests. They have already taken place at Zaitzkofen, Germany. Let us pray that God will bless these seminaries and give those who are studying for the priesthood the many graces they need.

My dear friends, in a few minutes you will be ordained priests. You know, I am sure, today more than ever, that ordination will put you into the very heart of the work of redemption of Our Lord Jesus Christ. By His Sacrifice on the Cross, Our Lord set Himself to create priests, to create a share in His eternal Priesthood for those He chose to prolong His Sacrifice, the source of the graces of the Redemption, because it is the great work of God. God created everything to be redeemed. This is His great work of love.

For this He created everything the world which we see around us. He did it by the Cross. He did it for the redemption of souls. He did it by the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. He did it for priests. He did it so that souls could be united to Him, especially as Victim in the Holy Eucharist. He gives Himself to us as Victim, so that we may offer our own lives with His, and thus share not only in our own redemption, but also in that of others.

This plan of God, this thought of God which brought the world into being, is a most extraordinary thing. We are astonished at this great mystery which Almighty God has brought into being here below. And precisely because the sacrifice of Our Lord is at the heart of the Church, at the heart of our salvation, at the heart of our souls, everything touching on the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass touches us profoundly, touches each one of us, personally, because we must participate in the Holy Sacrifice for the salvation of our souls, because we must receive the Blood of Jesus by baptism and the other sacraments, especially the Sacrament of the Altar, in order to save our souls.

This is why we are so attached to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass - the more so as they want to change it and make it (so they say) more acceptable to those who are not of our faith, who do not have the Catholic Faith. All these changes in the last few years in the most precious thing in the Church, the Liturgy, have been made to bring us closer to our separated brethren, that is to say, to those who are not of our Faith.

So our hearts are troubled, our minds and our faith are aroused. We ask ourselves: "How can they water down this truth, the greatest, most mysterious, most beautiful, most divine thing in our Church, the Holy Roman Catholic Church, to bring it down to the level of heretics?" We don't understand; and in this spirit, we ask ourselves how clerics were brought into the Church with ideas that are not those of the Church, not truly fortified by the Holy Ghost, not filled with the spirit of truth, but with the spirit of error and could get to the highest levels in the Church and put through these reforms which are destroying the Church. What a mystery!

How can it be? How could Almighty God allow it? How could Our Lord make these promises to Peter and his successors, to the church and to all the successors of the Apostles, and then allow this state of affairs we see before us today? Blessed those faithful who came before us and did not have such problems to face and resolve!

Briefly, I would like to try to explain what it seems to me our course of action should be in the face of these sad developments taking place in the Church. It seems to me that we can compare this agony the Church is suffering today to the Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ. You see how astonished the Apostles themselves were when Our Lord was taken and bound after the kiss of Judas. He is taken away. He is clothed in a scarlet robe, mocked, beaten, weighed down with the Cross. And the Apostles run away; they are scandalized. It is not possible that He Whom Peter proclaimed: "Thou art the Christ, the Son of God"- can be reduced to this plight, this humiliation, this destruction. It cannot be. They run away.

Only the Virgin Mary, with St. John and some women remain with Our Lord and keep the faith. They will not abandon Him. They know that Our Lord is truly God, but they also know that He is man. It is precisely this union of the Divinity with the Humanity of Our Lord that poses extraordinary difficulties. Our Lord in fact did not want to be merely man; He wanted to be a man like us, with all the results of sin yet without sin, apart from sin; but He wanted to accept all the consequences: sadness, fatigue, suffering, thirst, hunger, death. Yes, right up to His death, Our Lord embodied this extraordinary thing that so scandalized the Apostles, as it indeed scandalized many others who turned their backs on Our Lord and did not believe in the divinity of Our Lord.

Throughout the history of the Church, one comes across these people who are so surprised at the weakness of Our Lord that they cannot believe He is God. This was the case with Arius. Arius said no, it won't do, that man cannot be God, because He said He was less than His Father, that His Father was greater than He. He is therefore less than His Father. He is therefore not God. And then Our Lord said that astonishing thing, "My soul is sorrowful, even unto death." How could He, with the Beatific Vision, seeing God in His human soul, and thus far more glorious than weak, far more eternal than temporal His soul already in eternity and blessed yet here He is, saying, "My soul is sorrowful, even unto death," and goes on to utter those astonishing words we could never imagine on the lips of Our Lord, "My God, my God, why hast Thou abandoned Me?" Hence the scandal, alas, which spreads among weak so uls. Arius takes practically the entire Church with him in saying this Man is not God.

Others, on the other hand, go the other way and say that perhaps everything Our Lord endured, spilling blood, the wounds, the Cross, all that was imaginary. They were external phenomena but not real. Rather like the archangel Raphael, when he went with Tobias and later revealed to him, "'You thought I was eating when 1 had dinner with you, but I am nourished with a spiritual nourishment." The archangel Raphael did riot have a body like that of Our Lord Jesus Christ. He was not born of an earthly mother, as our Lord was born of the Virgin Mary. Was Our Lord an illusion like that and only appeared to eat, but did not really eat, or appear to suffer but did not really suffer? There were those who denied the human nature of Our Lord Jesus Christ: the Monophysites, the Monothelites, who denied the human nature and the human will of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Everything about Him was God (they claimed), and everything that seemed to happen was only an illusion.

So you see what happens to those who are scandalized by reality and truth. Let me make a comparison with the Church of today. We thought the Church was truly divine, that she could never deceive herself or deceive us.

Well, it is true, the Church is divine; She cannot lose the Truth. The Church will always be the guardian of Truth. But She is also human. The Church is human and indeed more human than Our Lord Jesus Christ was. Our Lord could not sin. He is the Holy One, the Just One par excellence.

The Church, if she is divine and truly divine, transmits to us all the things of God, especially the Holy Eucharist - eternal things which can never change and which will be the glory of our souls in heaven. Yes, the Church is divine, but she is human too. She is made up of men who may be sinners, indeed, who are sinners, and yet who share somehow in the divinity of the Church, to a certain extent like the Pope, for example, by his infallibility; by the charism of infallibility he shares in the divinity of the Church and yet remains human. They all remain sinners. Except in those instances where the Pope makes use of his charism of infallibility, he can err, he can sin.

Why be scandalized and say, like some people following the example of Arius, that he is not pope? He is not Pope, as Arius said Christ was not God, it cannot be, Our Lord cannot be God. We ourselves may be tempted to say that it cannot be, he cannot be Pope and do what he is doing.

On the other hand, others would divinize the Church to the point that everything in it becomes perfect. So everything in the Church being perfect, we could say there is no question of our doing anything whatever to oppose anything coming out of Rome; we must accept everything coming out of Rome. Those who talk this way are like those who say that Our Lord was God to such an extent that He could not suffer, that He gave only the illusion of suffering, but in reality did not suffer; in reality it was not His blood that flowed. Those around Him had only illusions in their eyes not reality. There are some of these today who go on saying there can be nothing human, nothing imperfect in the Church. They too are mistaken. They do not see the reality of things. How far can imperfection in the Church go, how high can sin go, if I may say it, in the Church, sin in the intellect, sin in the soul, sin in the heart and in the will? The facts tell us.

As I said a moment ago, we would never have dared to put on the lips of Our Lord the words, "My God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?" So too, we would never have thought that evil and error could penetrate so deeply into the Church. But we are living in this age; we cannot shut our eyes. The facts are there; it is not merely a subjective impression. We are witnesses of what is happening in the Church, of the terrible things that have happened since the Council, the ruins piling up day after day, year after year, in Holy Church. The more we go on, the more the errors spread and the more the faithful lose the Catholic Faith. A recent study in France shows that hardly more than two million French Catholics are still really Catholic.

We are nearing the end. Everyone will fall into heresy. Everyone will fall into error because wicked clergy, as St. Pius X predicted, have found their way into the Church and occupied it. They have spread errors from the positions of authority they occupy in the Church.

Are we then required to follow error because it comes from someone in authority? No more than we should obey parents who are unworthy and ask us to do unworthy things, no more should we obey those who ask us to abandon our Faith and to abandon all Tradition. This is out of the question. Oh, of course, all this is a mystery, a great mystery, this union of the divine with the human.

The Church is divine, and the Church is human. How far can human weakness how shall I say overshadow the divinity of the church? Only God knows. It is a great mystery. We see the facts; we must put ourselves in full view of the facts and never abandon the Church, the Roman Catholic Church, never abandon her, never abandon the successor of Peter, because through him we are united to Our Lord Jesus Christ, through the Bishop of Rome, the successor of Peter. But if, by some misfortune, under the influence of some spirit or other, or some weakness or pressure, or through neglect, he abandons his duty and leads us along roads which make us lose our faith, well, we must not follow, although at the same time we recognize that he is Peter and if he speaks with the charism of infallibility, we must accept his teaching, but when he does not speak with the charism of infallibility, he may very well be mistaken alas! It is not the first time that something like this has happened in history.

We are deeply troubled, deeply anguished, we who love the Church so much and venerate her and have always venerated her. This is why this seminary exists, for love of the Church Catholic and Roman. This is why all seminaries exist. Our love of the Church has been badly bruised to think that her servants, alas, are not her servants any longer and render her no service at all. We must pray, we must sacrifice and, we must, like Mary, stay at the foot of the Cross and not abandon Our Lord Jesus Christ, even if He seems, as the Scriptures, say, "as it were accursed" on the Cross. Well, the Virgin Mary had the faith and she saw beyond the wounds, beyond the pierced Heart. She saw God in her Son, her Divine Son.

We too, in spite of the wounds in the Church, in spite of the difficulties, the persecution which we are enduring, even from those in authority in the Church, let us not abandon the Church, let us love the Holy Church our mother, let us serve her always in spite of the authorities, if necessary. In spite of these authorities who wrongly persecute us, let us stay on the same road, let us keep to the same path: we want to support the Holy Roman Catholic Church, we want to keep it going and we will keep it going by means of the priesthood of Our Lord Jesus Christ, by the true sacraments of Our Lord Jesus Christ, by the true catechism.

Why, my dear friends?

You see, I was ordained in the traditional, immemorial Mass myself and all my colleagues, up to a certain age - they received the power to celebrate the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass in this immemorial Roman Rite. Remember that: I was ordained in this rite and I do not want to leave it, I do not wish to abandon it. It is the Mass for which I was ordained and for which I wish to continue living. It is truly the Mass of the Roman Catholic Church.

Be faithful, faithful to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. It will give you so many consolations, so many joys, so much support in your troubles, in your trials, in the persecutions you may well undergo. You will find the strength with Our Lord Jesus Christ to endure all these insults; you will find this strength in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. In truly giving Our Lord Jesus Christ His Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity to the faithful, you will give them also the courage to stay with the Church in her tradition and to model themselves on all the saints who have gone before, all who have been canonized, beatified, held up as examples of holiness in Holy Church. They will continue to be our models.

May the Virgin Mary in particular be our model. Let us ask her to make of you, my dear friends, holy priests, priests such as she wishes. If you invoke her throughout your life, she will protect you and will make of you priests according to the heart of Our Lord Jesus Christ, her Divine Son.


In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

Print this item

  Archbishop Lefebvre - Contra Sedevacantism 1989
Posted by: Stone - 11-19-2020, 07:53 AM - Forum: Sermons and Conferences - No Replies

Archbishop Lefebvre contra the Sedevacantists
Retreat at Saint-Michel en Brenne, April 1st, 1989

Concerning the position of Archbishop Lefebvre on the “non una cum” sedevacantist position, after the Episcopal Consecrations of 1988; here is an excerpt from a conference given by Archbishop Lefebvre during a retreat preached to the Sisters of Saint-Michel en Brenne1, France, on April 1st, 1989.

« … And then, he (Dom Guillou O.S.B.2) goes through all the prayers of the Canon, all the prayers of the Roman Canon. He goes through them one after the other and then he shows the difference, he gives translations, very good ones. He gives, for example, precisely this famous.. you know, this famous una cum.., una cum of the sedevacantists. And you, do you say una cum? (laughter of the nuns of St-Michel-en-Brenne). You say una cum in the Canon of the Mass! Then we cannot pray with you; then you’re not Catholic; you’re not this; you’re not that; you’re not.. Ridiculous! Ridiculous! because they claim that when we say una cum summo Pontifice, the Pope, isn’t it, with the Pope, so therefore you embrace everything the Pope says. It’s ridiculous! It’s ridiculous! In fact, this is not the meaning of the prayer.
 
Te igitur clementissime Pater. This is the first prayer of the Canon. So here is how Dom Guillou translates it, a very accurate translation, indeed:

“We therefore pray Thee with profound humility, most merciful Father, and we beseech Thee, through Jesus Christ, Thy Son, Our Lord, to accept and to bless these gifts, these presents, these sacrifices, pure and without blemish, which we offer Thee firstly for Thy Holy Catholic Church. May it please Thee to give Her peace, to keep Her, to maintain Her in unity, and to govern Her throughout the earth, and with Her, Thy servant our Holy Father the Pope.”

It is not said in this prayer that we embrace all ideas that the Pope may have or all the things he may do. With Her, your servant our Holy Father the Pope, our Bishop and all those who practice the Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox faith! So to the extent where, perhaps, unfortunately, the Popes would no longer have …, nor the bishops…, would be deficient in the Orthodox, Catholic and Apostolic Faith, well, we are not in union with them, we are not with them, of course. We pray for the Pope and all those who practice the Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox faith!
 
Then he (Dom Guillou) had a note about that to clarify a little:
 
“In the official translation, based on a critical review of Dom Botte O.S.B.3, the UNA CUM or “in union with” of the sedevacantists of any shade is no longer equivalent but to the conjunction “and ” reinforced either by the need to restate the sentence, or to match the solemn style of the Roman canon. Anyway, every Catholic is always in union with the Pope in the precise area where the divine assistance is exercised, infallibility confirmed by the fact that as soon as there is a deviation from the dogmatic Tradition, the papal discourse contradicts itself.
 
Let us collect the good grain, knowing that for the rest, it is more necessary than ever to ask God, with the very ancient Major Litanies, that be “kept in the holy religion” the “holy orders” and the “Apostolic Lord” himself (that is to say the Pope): UT DOMINUM APOSTOLICUM AND OMNES ECCLESIASTICOS ORDINES IN SANCTA RELIGIONE CONSERVARE DIGNERIS, TE ROGAMUS, AUDI NOS.”
 
It is a request of the litanies of the Saints, right? WE ASK TO KEEP THE POPE IN THE TRUE RELIGION. We ask that in the Litanies of the Saints! This proves that sometimes it can happen that unfortunately, well, maybe sometimes it happens that… well there have been hesitations, there are false steps, there are errors that are possible. We have too easily believed since Vatican I, that every word that comes from the mouth of the Pope is infallible. That was never said in Vatican I! The Council never said such a thing. Very specific conditions are required for the infallibility; very, very strict conditions. The best proof is that throughout the Council, Pope Paul VI himself said “There is nothing in this Council which is under the sign of infallibility”. So, it is clear, he says it himself! He said it explicitly.
 
Then we must not keep this idea which is FALSE! which a number of Catholics, poorly instructed, poorly taught, believe! So obviously, people no longer understand anything, they are completely desperate, they do not know what to expect! We must keep the Catholic faith as the Church teaches it. »  
  
1 — General Mother House of the Sisters of the Society.
[font="Times New Roman", serif]
 
2 — A famous traditionalist benedictine monk, friend of Archbishop Lefebvre.[/font]

 
3 — A famous Belgian modernist monk. It is he who made the New Rite of the Consecrations of Bishops.


 
Source 
 

Print this item